More businesses still block employee-owned Macs than Windows PCs

A significant percentage of enterprises do not allow employee-owned Macs …

Forty-one percent of enterprises do not allow employee-owned Macs access to any company resources, even Web-based e-mail, according to the results of a new Forrester survey of IT executives at North American and European companies.

Individual items on the list saw varying levels of support: six percent say they will install corporate applications on employee-owned Macs; 14 percent will install security software on user-owned Macs; 19 percent allow access from native e-mail applications; 21 percent allow access to the internal network; and another 21 percent are OK with Macs accessing virtual desktops and applications. Thirty-seven percent allow Internet access and 51 percent say Web-based e-mail is allowable, with the discrepancy suggesting some companies allow access to a Web-based e-mail client but not public websites.

The Forrester report only talks about employee-owned Macs, so it doesn’t take into account the fact that some businesses would block access from any employee-owned computer or device. But in response to this question from Ars, Forrester tells us that its research shows only 32 percent of companies block all access from employee-owned Windows PCs.

So employees who want to use Macs instead of Windows may have to buy the computers themselves. This is both because Macs tend to be pricey and because of corporate policies. As Forrester analyst David Johnson puts it in the report, “End user computing professionals steeped in two decades of Microsoft management traditions are either prohibiting Macs on the company network or limiting their support to executives only.” Forrester, which conducted interviews as part of its report, said only one company it spoke with is offering a MacBook as a company-paid option, but others do offer stipends giving employees some of the money needed to buy an Apple computer.

Supporting Macs is a challenge for Windows shops

Forrester notes that Macs pose technology challenges to IT shops accustomed to Windows. But these challenges can be overcome, and giving employees more choice will improve productivity, Forrester says. “There is a correlation between innovative, productive company performance and personal freedom for personal computing choices,” the report states.

Mac users who must access Windows applications can use Parallels or VMware Fusion virtual machines, but Forrester said this should be treated as a stopgap on the way to an infrastructure that accommodates both Windows and Mac OS X. Forrester said one large technology vendor in Silicon Valley (not Apple) with more than 5,000 Macs offers standard Mac images with preloaded software, antivirus and group policy integration for enforcing passwords and screen saver policies, and “made configuration changes to core business applications such as Microsoft Exchange Server” to ensure compatibility.

The firm also notes that IT can and should ask end users to take responsibility for their machines and adapt to the corporation’s legitimate needs. “Keep the majority of responsibility in the end user’s hands, but implement tools such as image deployment, group policy integration, and Windows file sharing utilities to prevent hangovers once the party’s over,” Forrester says. “As an IT professional, you need to be seen as a consummate service professional and find innovative ways to add value. You can’t afford to be seen as an obstacle to productivity, but you can certainly ask revolutionaries to do their part, as long as you explain what that is.”

Driven by power users, Macs make inroads into the enterprise

The Forrester survey also found that 22 percent of enterprises are seeing a significant increase in use of employee-owned Macs. The bans on activities like accessing e-mail “leaves a lot of employees to find their own ways to get around corporate prohibition.” Johnson talks about a class of employees who are “addicted” to being productive, and are frustrated by corporate PCs “saddled with management, backup and security agents” slowing things down. “They’re drawn to uncluttered Macs—especially those with solid-state drives, which are more responsive and boot in seconds,” Johnson writes.

While Johnson didn’t go so far as to say that Mac users are more productive than Windows users, he did write that employees who seek out new technologies tend to be more productive and serve customers more effectively. “Most of the Macs today are being freewheeled into the office by executives, top sales reps, and other workaholics,” he writes. Johnson recommends that businesses ease Macs into the organization with “a self-supporting community of Mac users” who can help IT publish how-to guides and helpful documents addressing basic needs like e-mail configuration and VPN access.

File sharing is still an issue as well. “After nearly 20 years, you’d think Windows file sharing would ‘just work’ with other platforms, given that the information people want to share across the enterprise belongs to them and not to Microsoft,” Johnson writes. “But you’d be wrong.There are still frustrating problems with file permission carry-through from network file shares to Macs and vice versa, and the symptoms are dropped connections to Windows file shares, unexpected file locking, and nonfunctional Mac searching across Windows shares. GroupLogic makes a tool that solves most of these problems.”

While new management requirements may seem daunting to under-funded IT departments, Johnson claims technology departments that stand in the way “will eventually get run over.” Ars has been making similar points about consumer technologies in general as part of our “Consumerization of IT” series, in which we’ve looked at the impact of smartphones, tablets, social networking, rapid browser releases, and other trends on enterprise technology.

UPDATE: Many readers see little difference in 32% of IT shops blocking Windows PCs, and 41% blocking Macs. We originally characterized this as "IT hating on Macs," using a familiar colloquialism to indicate that Macs receive an extra share of scorn from network operators. We view the 28% difference between these numbers as significant. Regardless, the point of research from Forrester is broader than any specific number, and we regret that the headline detracted from the many other aspects of this article that are substantive.

451 Reader Comments

The problem is that apples do not play nicely with a windows server. I have been going through HELL just trying to get this done with 4 new imacs.

Imacs do NOT do group policy at all. You can buy 3rd aprty software that gets macs to like group policy but its not perfect.

It basically ends up that every mac would have to be on its OWN network because you cannot get them perfectly secured if your using a windows server.

Its all in group policy. Everybody says windows sucks BUT group policy is a big must for any replacement. Yes mac has its semi version with apple server but it does not allow everything group policy does.

Any employee that wants to use a mac will have access through the public wifi and vpn into the staff for document access, or email is browser based. Anything else forget it until apple plays nicely with group policy and windows server.

Heck even for patron time management for public labs I have only found 2 products. one very very expensive and one that barely does anything.

Its been a pain trying to get macs integrated. If it was easier i wouldnt mind. Personally i dont mind which os they use but work wise its just not practical yet.

At last, more light than heat.

The solution to using Macs lies in the trends toward gateways, virtualized desktops, cloud storage, and perhaps in Apple's move toward virtualization. In my company, those who chose to use Macs did their own configuration and connected through VPN, which I admit is not particularly secure. Now that they gave up hosted Exchange and moved to Microsoft-hosted email, I can connect from any of my machines (BTW, configuration of Outlook on my iMac was a ton easier than on my PC or Windows phone - I just typed in the email address and it found it and synced; done.)

Another issue is that Microsoft "dumbs down" their products in the Mac version. Outlook on the Mac has fewer features than on the PC, and the MS RDP client for the Mac doesn't handle gateways. Office isn't really configured to handle cross-platform collaboration; they don't sync updates or anything like that. And Office on the Mac won't open some documents that PCs will open. Lots of little details like that which are not "little" when encountered in an enterprise environment.

But mobile access is a *lot* easier on Apple products than PC products, although Microsoft is belatedly catching up. And Mobile access is playing a larger and larger role in modern business. But the Microsoft and Android products are going to provide many of the same problems as iPhones and iPads, so IT is going to have to adjust. Somehow.

Apple computers and iDevices put IT staff out of work. THAT is why the HATE. It's that old story: They just work. So long unneeded IT staff.

Seeing as hardware and software the 'just works' is the future, like it or not, I have zero sympathy for IT staff that censor Apple gear. Get out of the way. The future is here.

Enterprise employees: Bring in your Apple gear ANYWAY and support it YOURSELF, because you can. And it will be orders of magnitude more secure than that Microsoft stuff the IT staff are pushing on you.

And when the Apple gear breaks the enterprise portion?

Oh yeah, let's watch John Q. Jobslite from the Genius Bar fiddle around in a mail server and find out why it isn't working...

If allowing an Apple client to access your Exchange server breaks it, then your Exchange admin is ignorant, under qualified or perhaps both.

Not really - new problems, new KBs, new bugs, new exploits develop all the bloody time. When a user sets his ipad's activesync settings to sync constantly, it can create a log file overrun. Shit happens.

Shit happens to those who are ignorant, especially.

I'm an Exchange admin and have Mac clients. Lots of them. We are talking about company issued Mac though, not ones off the street. We don't have problems like you are describing due to competence with the tools and technology involved.

We have a willingness to serve the users workflow to maximize everyones productivity. No one can make this a reality more so than the IT department, so we take the responsibility in stride. Consequently we have great employee retention and a deep talent pool. Skilled people want to work here. Go figure.

+2

So why am I not surprised that an organization which uses Macs has an enlightened IT group? :-)

Surveys are not properly scientific, and in this case, we were only privy to what Forrester would tell us. They felt the numbers to be comparable on some level, so we mentioned them. Had we known that so many people would exclusively be interested in the degree to which one platform versus the other is banned, rather than the fact that one is certainly more band then the other, we would have asked more questions along those lines.

I think you've hit on a follow-up article.

Yep! It's probably going to come out tomorrow, or Monday AM at the latest. Preview: the data we reported is indeed solid.

You: That's great, but I have no intention of going outside today.-----------

You: I'm going outside.

Mac: It's raining outside...

Get it now, Einstein, or do I still need to draw a diagram?

It has been shown that many people can't simply ignore the messages. Why should the user have to? Tell you what, next time you hear half of a phone conversation just ignore it, ok? Let's see how that works out for ya...

Again: How is it that being completely incompetent at your job is the computer's fault? Is it the computer's fault you were distracted when you had your twitter, facebook, and a game of Angry Birds all going on at the same time? Is it the computer's fault you had to drop to your knees in sheer, utter confusion because the words "An Update for Windows is available"?

If you can't get the job done in the allotted time that it needs to be done and you blame the computer's pop-ups distracted you to your boss? You'd better start filing for unemployment.

Enough of this silliness. You clearly don't get it - and you don't work where I do. A Windows house, and a cube farm, where too few people are trying to do too much serious work. And from one direction or another (mostly Ops and Eng), with too much regularity, I hear, "All right, already!", "I know, I know!", "Just go a-*way*!" I have the same problem: Windows is infuriating, and always has been (I've worked with it since 3.0). It has an ever-expanding arsenal of ways to keep you from getting work done - like IE classifying Javascript the same as ActiveX, so if you want to give it permission before running ActiveX scripts you also have to give it permission for running Javascript (I think, anyway - that's the best explanation I've come up with for how I had to manage the opaque settings to get the browser to work). Or last week's debacle - spending an hour trying to download SQL 2008 SP2 from the Microsoft site, resetting all the IE security settings in various combinations, and ultimately failing. I mentioned my frustration to another engineer, and he said, "Yeah, I get that all the time. I just use Firefox." And it worked - Microsoft's own product prevents me from updating my Microsoft software, but an open source browser works fine.

Sure, no substance to this at all. It's now an open joke when I swear at some popup which is trying to guess what I want to do and getting in my way, someone will say in a smarmy parent-to-child voice, "But they're only trying to *help*!" And everyone laughs.

There are a lot of reasons why Mac users can be more productive. I hadn't thought of this one, but it sure resonated with me!

Amusing thread but I don't think the author (or a lot of the poster here) has really done his homework.

Look, in the real world of IT, compliance, stability, performance per $$, and effectiveness are king. This means that the vast majority of the users get the basic desktop or laptop, with the basic software. They are all locked down for obvious reasons. If you install Photohop on your work PC, and Adobe comes to audit, then it is the IT departments problem when its dicovered you are out of compliance! You get what you need for your job, we maintain and patch your machine, and connect you to the servies you need. Every 4 years, a tech shows up and you get a new computer.

Now, this is normal for the vast majority, but there are exceptions. Workstations, tablets, UNIX, and yes... even macs. To get one, you follow an approval process, but if you have solid business case, it gets approved. Personal preference is not a business case!

The trick is that IT manages your mac, and you get the corporate image. And yep, unless you can justify admin on the mac, it gets locked down as well.

This consumerization stuff is really just kind of silly.

Well, this is the theory, but the devil is in the details. Sure, if you're running a call center, then a single configuration is all people need, and all you want them to have. But I've been through this many times over the past years. Sorry, you can't have a company cellphone; you don't meet the criteria. No, you can't have a laptop, you don't meet the criteria.

More recently, I had my Verizon card pulled - they were trying to save money, and I didn't use it enough. Never mind that every 4 weeks I'm SA on Call, and the resident expert who's called day or night for certain types of site issues. Share one, they said - although: a) my laptop was a different model than the ones the other SAs had, and used a different card; and b) we're all resident experts in our fields - it's a small group - and taking someone else's card meant *they* might not be available if we needed them.

My database of SQL queries was kept in Filemaker. It was my own licensed software, but it was installed on my laptop. The company has no similar product, and why should I spend the time writing something in VB for some other database product, and although various engineers have tried to build something for general use, it's never gone very far. Now my laptop has been reimaged, and the latest version of Filemaker has only two licenses instead of 3, and I don't want to burn my spare on a work computer. But IT is not about to buy me a copy of Filemaker. So if I need a query, I have to either rewrite it or wait until I get home so I can look it up on the Mac.

And when we're talking about developer machines, we have yet another issue. Our engineering and QA departments spec and buy their own machines, because the corporate specs are inadequate. And buy the displays out of their own budget, because the corporate "standard" 19" monitors are too small to use effectively, even with two of them. The new company standard laptop is a 13", the on call team's case for larger displays didn't impress them - they don't want to spend more, and don't want to support multiple models.

So in my experience, this policy works better in principle than in actuality.

Most recent stats are 95% windows 5% mac. So....Honestly they are good machines but I don't like the closed "do it our way" method of thinking and I REALLY dislike the fawning cult-like attitude that seems to be prevalent Mac folk. I used Linx. Liked it. But most of my apps I use are Windows. So I use that. I like 7 much better than Vista and though I can use Mac, why would I then either (a) want to dual boot windows or (b) run vmware or parallels? Windows is just fine for most people. The problem is "shiny marketing" which Apple was good at. We'll see what happens with Jobs gone, who I respected.

This is poor reasoning for a lack of Mac support. Very, very poor. You have a job to do, who cares about cults and the like. Just do your job.

Exactly. You've got a job to do. So why do so many insist on doing it on the OS or hardware of their personal choice instead of what the company provides? Do your job and don't complain about what OS you use.

Well yes, but that doesn't counter the point that wkya_radio made. The religious zeal that has been demonstrated is beyond stupefying. The job of IT is to service users. End of. That is not to suggest that IT should acquiesce to every demand, but should listen to business cases and act accordingly. It is not down to the support technician or engineer to decide policy. Of course they should be consulted on policy, but to the same level as everyone else. At the risk of sounding clichéd, business is a team sport and reading the majority of the post here is worrying, as clearly quite a few individuals seem to think they are bigger than the team.

Most recent stats are 95% windows 5% mac. So....Honestly they are good machines but I don't like the closed "do it our way" method of thinking and I REALLY dislike the fawning cult-like attitude that seems to be prevalent Mac folk. I used Linx. Liked it. But most of my apps I use are Windows. So I use that. I like 7 much better than Vista and though I can use Mac, why would I then either (a) want to dual boot windows or (b) run vmware or parallels? Windows is just fine for most people. The problem is "shiny marketing" which Apple was good at. We'll see what happens with Jobs gone, who I respected.

This is poor reasoning for a lack of Mac support. Very, very poor. You have a job to do, who cares about cults and the like. Just do your job.

Exactly. You've got a job to do. So why do so many insist on doing it on the OS or hardware of their personal choice instead of what the company provides? Do your job and don't complain about what OS you use.

I see where you got your name. The answer is simple, and obvious - because many of us *care* about our jobs, and want to see the companies we work for succeed, and so want to do best job we can, and accomplish the maximum amount of work in (often excessive) time we spend on the company's behalf.

And the company doesn't give us the best tools to *do* that work, and so we spend far too much of our time putzing around, developing work-arounds, maintaining our software and equipment, and just being aggravated and frustrated.

I could recite a litany. The most recent issue: the company has standardized on a 13" laptop, and we're all having our laptops replaced. Wait a minute, we said - nice computer, but you expect us to manage hundreds of servers, multiple command windows and RDP sessions, on a 1200x768 display? We need larger laptops, at least as large as the ones we have now, and preferably larger. Well, other people are using external displays, IT responded; you can do that too. Ummm - what part of "portable" don't you get? When I'm home, I can access my workstation from my Macs; this is so I can respond when I'm *not* at home - e.g. roadside, or on vacation. And are you going to provide us with a second docking station and an external display to use at home? No, you only get one docking station.

So instead of writing purge scripts, generating core reports, improving monitoring, etc. - what they pay me to do - I'm managing (at my boss's request) the process of replacing the Operations team's laptops, now down to the 7 people in two facilities who want a larger laptop, including identifying the optimal Dell laptop model, pricing SSDs as an option to extend the lives of our current machines, periodic followups, with no end in sight.

This makes no business sense whatever. Those 7 people are the last bastion between our product and the customer, and cost the company over $1 million per year, - but the company's not willing to spend an extra $1000 each (a quarter of a percent of their cost) to provide them with the best tools to do their jobs?

Why do I get alarms on my iPhone? Because the company gave me a piece-of-junk Windows phone which has a miniscule screen, requires me to operate the controls with a fingernail, and I have to use glasses and a ball-point pen to operate the keyboard. I carry it when I'm on call, but I don't *use* it.

It's not just about OS's, it's about equipment, software, capability and usability. When I have to do high-quality charts to make site performance relationships clear, I do it at home on the Mac - I have better tools and equipment for my own use than the company, which is paying ridiculous money to have me work at the computer all day, provides. Go figure.

Hmmm. I've now seen a couple of other reviews of the Forrester report. It seems a little more comprehensive than Brodkin reports. Fortune's Philip Elmer-DeWitt (http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/10/27/ ... t-the-mac/) entitles his article: "Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac".

Here's a quote from Elmer-DeWitt:<quote>Which makes the findings of the Forrester survey of 590 IT executives and decision makers that produced the chart above all the more surprising. "It's time to repeal prohibition and take decisive action," writes David Johnson in a new report made available to Fortune (and available for sale here). "Mac users are your HEROes and you should enable them not hinder them."

"HERO," it turns out, is a Forrester acronym for Highly Empowered and Resourceful Operatives -- "the 17% of information workers who use new technologies and find innovative ways to be more productive and serve customers more effectively."</quote>

What we've been saying. But Forrester's 2008 report said:

<quote>"IT departments crave standardization, and Macs pose too many problems for IT departments. The verdict for enterprise-focused vendors is clear: Unless your market is a niche business group, Windows is the only desktop you need support."</quote>

One can see how the bad rap for Macs and Mac users was proliferated. Now that Macs are actually appearing in the work place, it's crumbling before the reality we've known all along. In this thread:

CapuchinSeven:<quote>As for "experts" claiming Apple products are "notoriously" bad to run on a domain, we have zero problems with ours. Frankly we have less problems with the Macs than with the HP PCs.</quote>

Chookalana:<quote>Looking at these comments proves to me how bad and ignorant most IT services/techs still are. Our office was 90% Windows two years ago in an office of 230 people.

Now we are 85% Mac in our AD environment. Our service tickets went from an average of 37 per week to just 8. The Macs just have fewer issues all around for us. Yes, even our finance department uses Macs with Office 2011. </quote>

Ace Logan:<quote>My company, went from 800 Macs out of 22,000 desktop machines world wide in 2006. In 2011 there are now 5000 Macs out of 26,000 Desktop Machines worldwide. In this time the creative departments have had an overall 30% reduction in man power.

Internal estimates say that there has been a $1.2 million dollar a year cost savings in IT support since that time.

...

Keep in mind that the Support Center Certification states that a company should have 1 desktop person per every 50 Windows machines, and 1 for every 100 Macs. There is a significant savings in workforce reduction right there, which is still on top of increased Customer Service Satisfaction being on average 3 points higher across all metrics. </quote>

Of all the Apple IIs and Macs I've owned in the last 30 years, I've had only two "breaks" - when the internal battery died in my Quadra 605 (10-minute replacement), and when the flex connector to the video display gave up in an early Powerbook (after years of daily use; I had to use an external monitor)

OK, I have a friend who constantly blew up her iPhone. Eventually after 3 or 4 of them the people at Apple realised the USB port in her MBP was faulty and was frying them. Same friend needed something else repaired and had to wait weeks for some parts to be delivered. I can recall of the top of my head at least 3 people I know who needed to replace logic boards (whatever that is).

I am not trolling you, I promise I am not - but you just can't honestly tell me Apple hardware never breaks.

The very fact that there is such a thing as a genius bar (and apparently they are always super busy) means that either the hardware does break more often than twice in 30 years, the OS is more difficult to use than people say it is, or that Apple users are just plain stupid.

OK, I have a friend who constantly blew up her iPhone. Eventually after 3 or 4 of them the people at Apple realised the USB port in her MBP was faulty and was frying them. Same friend needed something else repaired and had to wait weeks for some parts to be delivered. I can recall of the top of my head at least 3 people I know who needed to replace logic boards (whatever that is).

I am not trolling you, I promise I am not - but you just can't honestly tell me Apple hardware never breaks.

The very fact that there is such a thing as a genius bar (and apparently they are always super busy) means that either the hardware does break more often than twice in 30 years, the OS is more difficult to use than people say it is, or that Apple users are just plain stupid.

What you are presenting is anecdotal and circumstantial evidence in order to back up your stated beliefs. This is fine, but if you check consumer rating organizations like J. D. Powers, Consumer Reports et al you will see Apple products rated very high. So while you have observed one thing, which should be taken into account, the information you are basing your assertions on is incomplete.

I have had mostly good experiences with Mac and "Wintel" machines, so I really can't speak ill of either from personal experience. I have observed more problems on Wintel machines than Macs, but I couldn't possibly tell you how the percentages would break down. That's the reason I go to outside sources to figure out which companies are hitting the price/quality/performance sweet spot...

I'm sorry but this is blatant troll flamebait. It is completely false and you know it.

I'm sorry, but the accumulated comments in this thread based on a hatered of the Mac and its users point to my statement being very true. Not of all of course, but at least a 50 + 1 % majority of the people who profess to be in the IT field display this unhinged visceral hatred of Apple and anyone that uses products from that company.

Or a very hinged hatred, as it seems most say 1) it makes their jobs more difficult or 2) the advantages of supporting OSX PCs AND Windows PCs doesn't pay.

Also, I use Linux, but I don't whine that my company doesn't support my preference.

Of all the Apple IIs and Macs I've owned in the last 30 years, I've had only two "breaks" - when the internal battery died in my Quadra 605 (10-minute replacement), and when the flex connector to the video display gave up in an early Powerbook (after years of daily use; I had to use an external monitor)

OK, I have a friend who constantly blew up her iPhone. Eventually after 3 or 4 of them the people at Apple realised the USB port in her MBP was faulty and was frying them. Same friend needed something else repaired and had to wait weeks for some parts to be delivered. I can recall of the top of my head at least 3 people I know who needed to replace logic boards (whatever that is).

I am not trolling you, I promise I am not - but you just can't honestly tell me Apple hardware never breaks.

The very fact that there is such a thing as a genius bar (and apparently they are always super busy) means that either the hardware does break more often than twice in 30 years, the OS is more difficult to use than people say it is, or that Apple users are just plain stupid.

My girlfriend had a picture frame fall and break the spacebar key on her 2009 MBP, cost hundreds of dollars to replace (I can't remember the exact figure). Meanwhile, my roommate's 2004 Dell had some keys wear out after seven years of use and I fixed it in two minutes for $8 (including shipping and handling).

My MacBook doesn't play audio through the speakers because it constantly thinks something is plugged in. It's a common problem in MBs and MBPs from its time (around 2008) and the typical "stick a toothpick in the headphone port" thing doesn't work. Getting it fixed would cost an arm and a leg.

Also, the bezel around my monitor has protruding edges to stop the screen from hitting the keyboard; however, these edges cause cracking on the bezel around the keyboard.

My friend's iMac had a software malfunction that wouldn't let her into the OS. The Bluetooth controller in the kernel broke and her standard Mac keyboard was BT at the time.

Meanwhile, my $300 2009 Asus Netbook has had no problems whatsoever.

Macs are great, but they certainly aren't without flaws. I just wanted to contribute a little from my Mac experience.